Dmtdust wrote:

phreddy wrote:

XregnaR wrote:

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy. It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush. I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop. And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

I give a shit that the man ignored all of the ample warnings about Bin Laden's plans, and then used a ruse to invade Iraq to pay back some supposed slight that Bush Sr. had from Saddam. Several thousand dead American & British forces died for that asswipes lies, plus countless Iraqi's, the majority of them civilians for that little perves transgressions. Stand Trial? I want to see him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

That man started the fucking run away train of the NSA shitting down our collective throats, and you think that was a nasty little swipe? I was being generous to that fucking war criminal.

Sorry, the public's short-term memory is already starting to alter history.

Baywolfe wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

phreddy wrote:

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush. I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop. And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

I give a shit that the man ignored all of the ample warnings about Bin Laden's plans, and then used a ruse to invade Iraq to pay back some supposed slight that Bush Sr. had from Saddam. Several thousand dead American & British forces died for that asswipes lies, plus countless Iraqi's, the majority of them civilians for that little perves transgressions. Stand Trial? I want to see him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

That man started the fucking run away train of the NSA shitting down our collective throats, and you think that was a nasty little swipe? I was being generous to that fucking war criminal.

Sorry, the public's short-term memory is already starting to alter history.

Dmtdust wrote:

This was an interesting take. I see it also as a forewarning. We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes. It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions. They certainly have the ability to do so. The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

phreddy wrote:

This was an interesting take. I see it also as a forewarning. We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes. It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions. They certainly have the ability to do so. The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Which is why we can't allow them to politicize the situation, the divide and conquer approach has been working far to well for them over the past few decades. The IRS scandal is a hilarious example - the complete irony of the concept of the IRS targeting anti-tax organizations being sold a political move is magnificent.

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

This was an interesting take. I see it also as a forewarning. We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes. It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions. They certainly have the ability to do so. The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Baywolfe wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

This was an interesting take. I see it also as a forewarning. We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes. It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions. They certainly have the ability to do so. The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

Dmtdust wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

Baywolfe wrote:

phreddy wrote:

This was an interesting take. I see it also as a forewarning. We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes. It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions. They certainly have the ability to do so. The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

I just sold a truck and deposited $11K in the bank. The teller had to fill out a federal notification form. I asked if it goes to the IRS, but she told me it goes on a report that goes to the SEC. I suppose they are looking for money laundering operations. What would really bother me would be automatic reports of all financial transactions, regardless of size, going to the IRS. The info could be used for any number of purposes beyond collecting taxes. It would be a treasure trove for political uses.

I use XE to transfer money from US to UK when the exchange rates are better. they limit all transactions to just under $10k US to ensure they don't have to mess with the paperwork. You can do large transfers, by signing up for a "special" account, fill out reams more paperwork, and pay a premium.

I have also been pulled aside at random when traveling to the UK and asked by an ICE agent whether I was carrying more than $10k.

phreddy wrote:

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

Tall Paul wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

Not to mention NASCAR and Waffle Houses.

And diners outside Blacksburg, VA, if anybody gets The West Wing reference.

choad wrote:

We knew they didn't buy all those billions of hollow points for target practice. If our government is this fearful of its own citizens, perhaps we need a complete restructuring. And, I don't mean just the elected idiots. Listening to some of the recent hearing testimony by those appointed to run things, it becomes obvious the bureaucracy is out of control.

phreddy wrote:

choad wrote:

We knew they didn't buy all those billions of hollow points for target practice. If our government is this fearful of its own citizens, perhaps we need a complete restructuring. And, I don't mean just the elected idiots. Listening to some of the recent hearing testimony by those appointed to run things, it becomes obvious the bureaucracy is out of control.

This is news? Where the fuck have you been for the last 50 years? Administrations come and go. The bureaucracy is with us forever; unelected, and uncontrolled.

phreddy wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Tall Paul wrote:

Did I read your statement correctly? Did you actually say that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is justified because evidence of guilt will only be presented after his conviction? Way to promote truth, justice and The American Way, Superman!

No Paul, you did not read my statement correctly, which is not unusual. I said evidence of the damage his crimes have caused will be presented at the penalty phase of his trial. You probably don't know that proving damage caused by his actions is not needed to convict him of aiding the enemy. However, after he is convicted, the judge takes those damages into account when deciding his fate. This is why you always see the family of the victims testifying during this phase. I hope this was helpful and enlightening for you.

phreddy wrote:

I just sold a truck and deposited $11K in the bank. The teller had to fill out a federal notification form. I asked if it goes to the IRS, but she told me it goes on a report that goes to the SEC. I suppose they are looking for money laundering operations. What would really bother me would be automatic reports of all financial transactions, regardless of size, going to the IRS. The info could be used for any number of purposes beyond collecting taxes. It would be a treasure trove for political uses.

Someone got hold of one of my credit card numbers and began attempting transactions with it of $9,500, in Mexico and Miami, on behalf of "Paradise." They, and I believe almost everybody else, knows the reporting threshold. This reporting requirement has been in place for years and doesn't seem particularly burdensome to me. On the other hand, I wonder if it yields anything useful at this point.

Are you still riding the IRS hobby horse, Phreddy? Sorry the story did not pan out the way you wished.

Fled wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Tall Paul wrote:

Did I read your statement correctly? Did you actually say that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is justified because evidence of guilt will only be presented after his conviction? Way to promote truth, justice and The American Way, Superman!

No Paul, you did not read my statement correctly, which is not unusual. I said evidence of the damage his crimes have caused will be presented at the penalty phase of his trial. You probably don't know that proving damage caused by his actions is not needed to convict him of aiding the enemy. However, after he is convicted, the judge takes those damages into account when deciding his fate. This is why you always see the family of the victims testifying during this phase. I hope this was helpful and enlightening for you.

Snarky, but basically correct.

Correct and right are two different things. If proving guilt of aiding the enemy can be done without demonstrating that the enemy has been aided, why even have a trial?

Tall Paul wrote:

Fled wrote:

phreddy wrote:

No Paul, you did not read my statement correctly, which is not unusual. I said evidence of the damage his crimes have caused will be presented at the penalty phase of his trial. You probably don't know that proving damage caused by his actions is not needed to convict him of aiding the enemy. However, after he is convicted, the judge takes those damages into account when deciding his fate. This is why you always see the family of the victims testifying during this phase. I hope this was helpful and enlightening for you.

Snarky, but basically correct.

Correct and right are two different things. If proving guilt of aiding the enemy can be done without demonstrating that the enemy has been aided, why even have a trial?

It's a Court Martial not a trial, two entirely different things. A trial isn't as brutal as you aren't normally tried by a jury of you "peers"...

choad wrote:

Priavacy, assasinate: George is safe!Steve Case: Seriously, has anyone talked about him in the last decade?WANK, Porno, 69: No comment.c, a, b, d, the: Clearly a highly-targeted list.Retinal Fetish: I'm afraid to find out what this is.Phon-e: They got Dec!illuminati: However, "fnord" does not appear on the list. Hmm...

XregnaR wrote:

Ronco, Armani, BOSS Seriously? I've started seeding my voice communications with dirty bombs. My mother was not amused at the beginning of our last phone call, but by the time we hung up she mentioned picking up my cousins and plastic explosives. No matter who we vote in or which of the bums we vote out they're going to continue, each new bunch truly are the pigs taking over the farm.

Yeah boss, I've been keeping track of this housewife in Kentucky who keeps posting "anonymous sex" online. I'm pretty sure it's a secret message to al queda. I need a travel chit so I can go check her out.